Snit
On 2/11/17, 10:24 AM, in article sandman-2cd86f38c211dee0e37c16696331a296@individual.net, "Sandman" <mr@sandman.net>wrote:

Sandman
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

In article <D4C48BB8.8F770%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote:

<http://web.archive.org/web/20060519191417/http://www.sandman.net>

Snit
Are you claiming that on 20060519191417 the CSS Validation Service shows your CSS is valid?

Sandman
What you snipped, because you can't respond to a reasoned post that contains facts:

Here is the link to the WayBackMachine archive of my home page, with heavily edited HTML code by the WBM:

<http://web.archive.org/web/20060519191417/http://www.sandman.net/>

In the HTML, there is *one* link to a CSS files:

<http://web.archive.org/web/20060509220758cs_/http://www.sandman.net/

clude/styles_plain.php>

WBM has added a comment to the top of it, that's all. As opposed to the HTML output, the content remains just as it was back then. And when you run that file in a CSS validator:

<https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator? uri=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20060509220758cs_%2Fhttp%3A%2F

sandman.net%2Fatlas%2Finclude%

&warning=1&vextwarning=&lang=en>

It is 100% valid. Clearly exposing your eleven year long lie. This is a *fact*. A fact that you can't counter, can't respond to, can't meet in any way other than silence.

Snit
<https://youtu.be/5OfWsoPAg7o>

Why, Jonas Eklundh, do you make it so easy to point out your lies?

...